"During the day or two after I published PETA: A Corporate Tangle of Contradictions, I had a friendly email exchange with a reader who wrote that she was reconsidering her support of PETA as a result of the blog entry, but that there was still a lot she liked about PETA. She mentioned specifically that she liked PETA's undercover investigations, and that the recent Land-o-Lakes investigation was one that stood out as an example.
Removed from the context of PETA's welfarist philosophy, undercover investigations don't seem problematic from an animal rights viewpoint. After all, human rights organizations routinely investigate, report, and display human rights violations to bring the public's attention to the problem and garner political support to end such abuses. As such, itâs understandable why someone who objects to many of PETA's activities might see undercover investigations as an exception â as an activity in which an animal rights organization would naturally engage.
Placed back into the context of PETA's welfarism, however, we see that their undercover investigations are more of the same single-issue and welfare campaigns dressed up in a heroic gown. Whereas a human rights organization would unequivocally claim that rights violations â slavery, exploitation, and killing â are wrong and should end, PETA merely wants the target exploiter to observe traditional welfare standards while rights violations continue." Dan Cudahy
This audio is part of the collection:Community Audio It also belongs to collection:
![[help]](/images/question.gif "[help]")
)![[Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0]](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-nd/3.0/88x31.png "[Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0]")